I'll go through you're initial response first. Partly to respond to your points but also to point out that despite its ridiculous length (I feel we are truly in the nuclear arms race of post size now), it has very little content.
First, some fluff where you claim to be Hope again (in case anyone thought you might claim Despair). You also attack kgtrep's role (take it up with Launch, I guess?) and his decision to use it:
Yawn.
This is going be a boring and pointless day.
That's a super non-Towny role. By focusing the lynch on one of two people, you waste a whole day if neither of those people are Hope. If you lynch me, you have absolutely nothing because, shocker, I am Hope, and you're on Day 2 with four dead Hope and no information because our power roles keep pissing around doing nothing, and in this case, actively restricting participation to two players. It also has a huge flaw in that it's tantamount to delivering a hammer on one of two players, but I'm assuming it activates at night, so you don't get any chance to ask if someone is a power role and back off. The very nature of the way that power role works - anti-information and anti-power role - makes me suspect it as a Despair role rather than a Hope role.
I know you already retracted that last statement, but let's not ignore the flawed logic on display there. It's entirely possible to question someone, back off, and THEN use this power in the night. 'Anti-info' and 'anti-PR' you didn't even bother to substantiate, these are mental gymnastics made to paint trep's role in the most negative light.
Distractions made, you now move on to some of trep's actual points:
But hey ho, let's go through your points. First one is something about how I'm passive-aggressive. No shit when we have geniuses like yourself making actions like this. Maybe if our key players actually made sensible decisions I wouldn't have to, but it's fairly clear that I'm not needed to cloud judgements, you're all capable of making stupid decisions by yourself.
This isn't an argument, this is a personal attack. There were hints of this yesterday and it's become more explicit today. I don't like it, but I do have a question about it:
How are you SO certain that the people attacking you are incompetent town? Surely it's just as possible that Despair players are attacking you to undermine you? I considered two possibilities
1. You are Hope. You are annoyed to be under attack by players whose opinions you do not respect. For some reason you do not consider the possibility that they are Despair and attack them for being especially incompetent Hope players.
2. You are Despair. You are annoyed to be under fire so early for what you consider to be the 'wrong' reasons. You attack your aggressors partly to undermine them but also to punish them for playing the game 'wrong'.
If there is a better explanation please provide it. To me option 1 makes much less tactical sense than option 2, and your chiding of CornBurrito for not voting on you yesterday was the post that swung me from doubt to outright distrust (and prompted me to vote).
Re: Hagi, I thought Hagi was less suspicious than scum. I don't have magical ninja control skills over the rest of town. You can't blame their votes on me, that's their responsibility.
This is easy to say but doesn't match up with reality. There was very little time for us to focus our votes and you must have been well aware of your influence over the group. You can claim until you're blue in the face that you don't want to be leader, it isn't going to stop people following you.
For the record, I'm attacking your argument here but I do not support this point by kgtrep. I don't blame you for Hagi, he was as good a choice as any in the time available.
The next one is some weird stuff about activity rates. I like to be active around the deadline, because otherwise you get Visualante'd, yes. You're also blaming me for Makai not giving reads again, after CornBurrito spent all day doing that yesterday. Finding me suspicious for posting lots near the deadline? Have you read any of the GAF mafia games before? People don't post until the deadline for some weird reason, so you can try and get information out of people before that and they just stonewall you like incompetents.
I'm not touching the activity stuff. The graphs were cool 'n' all, but I don't think being active near the deadline is much of a case for anything.
There isn't much else in this paragraph. A brief mention of Makai (which I think we're about to cover in better detail) and then another unnecessary personal comment against people not playing the game the 'right' way.
Finally, you just go over some bullshit stuff, again. I'm going to put this in bold letters so everyone gets the point.
IT WAS NOT NECESSARY FOR MAKAI TO CLAIM. IT IS ALMOST NEVER NECESSARY FOR PRS TO CLAIM
Let's go through the situation in which you claim: there are 10 votes on you, you need 11 for the lynch, and the 11th person says "you claim now, or I lynch you". Then you claim. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1 <----- READ THIS BIT CAREFULLY
Let's go through the situation in which you do not claim: there are 2 votes on you, you need 11 for the lynch, and 2nd person says "you give me suspects now, or I don't move my vote". Then you give suspects, like the game is supposed to work, and then those people move on, like the game is supposed to work. Gosh, difficult.
This is a long way of saying that Makai didn't play the game 'right' (I keep emphasising that, I will come back to it when I'm done with your posts). But here's a better idea: why not leave Makai for one day, just to see if he comes up with anything more substantial. You had suspicions from early on about him having a role, and it would have been very easy for you to move on. You even did once, noting that he was consistent in his responses and unlikely to suddenly change tack. You prodded Salva (and maybe someone else, don't remember) and then returned to Makai to push even harder. Again, I'll consider the options
1. You are Hope. You considered the possibility that he is a PR but decided against it, and were sure enough in this decision to keep probing him at the risk of being a PR.
2. You are Despair. You quickly identify and question the less active posters to see what drops. You identify one or more likely PRs and discover a safe path to attack Makai. You keep pushing for opinions he isn't going to give until he either gives his opinions (nevermind, get him later), reveals his role, or is lynched by the group. And hey, when his role is revealed you can just blame him, he should have played the way you told him to.
I'd like to point out that if Makai had been two hours later (stuck in traffic, power cut, busy, whatever) he would have been punished and we'd be having the exact same conversation, STILL with people trusting you but we'd be down a PR.
I'd also like to point out we left KingKitty off the hook for much less. To be honest I don't really understand what happened there.
You then say "we can't know Crab's true intent". Sure, fine, you can't. Doesn't mean I'm Despair, or by that logic all 21 of us are Despair.
This is disingenuous. kgtrep is simply stating that since we can't know your intent, people should consider multiple possibilities. I don't know why you even addressed this but your answer doesn't offer anything to support/discredit any of these possibilities.
You then say "ah, but look, he said he thought Makai wasn't a power role!". NO SHIT. What the fuck do you think happens to a power role if all of town go "Yup, they're probably a power role." Open power role speculation is NEVER a pro-town move - CzarTim called Corn out on it earlier and I totally agree. Even if I thought someone was absolutely and totally a PR, I would never say so. Never. Even if they were going to get lynched - the onus is on them to find a way out of it (although I wouldn't vote for them at the point of lynch).
This is kind of a repeat of earlier, but there are options beyond "keep attacking" and "call his role". Give him a day, it's literally all that he kept asking. If you are town, how were you so certain he wasn't a PR that you thought this was the best course of action?
Finally you say Makai followed my suggestion. Fuck off, no he didn't. Makai had, iirc, 2 or 3 votes on him when he claimed. That's patently not following (my advice) just about to lynched, and you know it. Lazy pushing at its worst.
more stuff about Makai, and I think you are underselling the situation here. We had 2 hours to go and Makai was running out of options by the time he claimed. He also had 5 votes, not 2 or 3.
I won't contest that Makai played poorly, but (if you are Hope) I don't think you were much better.
Then there's some stuff about my consistency. First you say I said "always give reasons when you vote" (true). Then you try to say I haven't given reasons (false), by pointing out I don't link to individual posts often. No shit, being scummy isn't about a single post, it's about a collective series of actions. If you actually read all of those posts, I give a reason in every single one, so you're lying. I gave reasons for those I didn't vote, too - kingkitty and Rest, so you're just straight up ignoring that.
I guess this is a fair defence on this point. I disagree if you are calling trep a liar for this though. I too felt you were moving the goalposts with your voting habits compared to your advice, and questioned you on this yesterday. I won't repeat that conversation now.
Final one is just boring. I put it both ways for emphasis. Here it is: I am not mafia because I am active as all hell, constantly contribute, make actual reasons, etc.
I've mentioned before how unhelpful it is to make these absolute statements.
I'll go through your other posts before looking for points you've ignored, but off the top of my head: my post about bandwagons?
Also, please explain where you feel Rest lied. And are you still claiming that I am a liar? If so, where?
